You seem to be doing the opposite than what the quote indicates, trying to find ways in which Voldemort supposedly benefitted, in order to present him as the person behind every ploy.
If Voldemort benefitted from his supposed defeat at the night of Godric’s Hollow, we’ve not yet seen how. If Voldemort benefitted from the burning of Narcissa Malfoy, we’ve not yet seen how.
You are following the exact opposite process than the quote indicates. Which may be okay, after all it’s only one technique, not the ONLY possible technique, but nonetheless quoting it as an explanation for your reasoning seems misguided.
quoting it as an explanation for your reasoning seems misguided.
This line seems to have caused some confusion downthread. On Percent_Carbon’s view, t’s a very good explanation for the reasoning, in that it seems to have generated understanding of the reasoning.
Well, I don’t know about “very good.” But it worked this time. I don’t think that was a good way to do what I wanted done, though. So I’ll probably not do that again.
Mostly agree with this comment, but it seems likely to me that HPMOR!Voldemort’s intentions in going to Godric’s Hollow were different than Canon!Voldemort’s, given that HPMOR!Voldemort is a lot smarter than Canon!Voldemort.
I don’t think similar reasoning applies to Narcissa’s death, because it’s less likely that Voldemort would have been able to foresee its effects.
Mostly agree with this comment, but it seems likely to me that HPMOR!Voldemort’s intentions in going to Godric’s Hollow were different than Canon!Voldemort’s, given that HPMOR!Voldemort is a lot smarter than Canon!Voldemort.
I agree with this. For that, and also for other reasons, I assign less than 20% probability that Voldemort went to Godric’s Hollow for a purpose as simple as “attempt to kill baby Harry”.
Oh, but even Canon!Voldemort meant to make a Horcrux when he went to Godric’s Hollow (or so speculated Dumbledore in book 6, IIRC). So I think there must have been more to it than even that.
Canon!Dumbledore speculated that Voldemort was going to kill Harry, and then create his last Horcrux using that death—but killing Harry was his primary purpose for going there; the fact that Voldemort also meant to make the last Horcrux at the time was incidental.
If you need further clarification about what I believe, I don’t think HPMoR!Voldemort purposed to kill Harry at all that night—atleast not physically.
I understand you’re following false reasoning, so I don’t know what “seems to have worked”. I, for one, don’t
believe that it was Voldemort who killed Narcissa Malfoy.
I said something. You understood what I meant. You explained it pretty clearly, too.
In that post, and I guess in the next one and maybe even in this one, I am advocating that those 9 steps are accurately Voldemort’s plan. But it is not important that I convince you, or anyone, that they are accurate. It is enough that I convince you to consider them. The theory’s own merits and flaws will determine its fate.
Respectfully, discussion and debate are not consider successful if all you do is cause the other person to understand your position. If no one’s position changes, something is wrong.
Again, my goal is not to convince you or anyone else.
My goal is to test the speculated scenario. I advocate for it not because I want to convince others, but because it doesn’t get much mileage on its own.
As it gets picked apart, I learn more about the the scenario itself, about the material it’s built on, and about the speculative process.
Respectfully, it is silly to assume that no one’s position is changing.
You seem to be doing the opposite than what the quote indicates, trying to find ways in which Voldemort supposedly benefitted, in order to present him as the person behind every ploy.
If Voldemort benefitted from his supposed defeat at the night of Godric’s Hollow, we’ve not yet seen how.
If Voldemort benefitted from the burning of Narcissa Malfoy, we’ve not yet seen how.
You are following the exact opposite process than the quote indicates. Which may be okay, after all it’s only one technique, not the ONLY possible technique, but nonetheless quoting it as an explanation for your reasoning seems misguided.
This line seems to have caused some confusion downthread. On Percent_Carbon’s view, t’s a very good explanation for the reasoning, in that it seems to have generated understanding of the reasoning.
Perhaps equivocating on ‘explanation’?
Well, I don’t know about “very good.” But it worked this time. I don’t think that was a good way to do what I wanted done, though. So I’ll probably not do that again.
Thanks for the defense, though.
Mostly agree with this comment, but it seems likely to me that HPMOR!Voldemort’s intentions in going to Godric’s Hollow were different than Canon!Voldemort’s, given that HPMOR!Voldemort is a lot smarter than Canon!Voldemort.
I don’t think similar reasoning applies to Narcissa’s death, because it’s less likely that Voldemort would have been able to foresee its effects.
I agree with this. For that, and also for other reasons, I assign less than 20% probability that Voldemort went to Godric’s Hollow for a purpose as simple as “attempt to kill baby Harry”.
Oh, but even Canon!Voldemort meant to make a Horcrux when he went to Godric’s Hollow (or so speculated Dumbledore in book 6, IIRC). So I think there must have been more to it than even that.
Canon!Dumbledore speculated that Voldemort was going to kill Harry, and then create his last Horcrux using that death—but killing Harry was his primary purpose for going there; the fact that Voldemort also meant to make the last Horcrux at the time was incidental.
If you need further clarification about what I believe, I don’t think HPMoR!Voldemort purposed to kill Harry at all that night—atleast not physically.
Seems to have worked, though. You understood. And if others wouldn’t have then you’ve explained it.
I understand you’re following false reasoning, so I don’t know what “seems to have worked”. I, for one, don’t believe that it was Voldemort who killed Narcissa Malfoy.
I said something. You understood what I meant. You explained it pretty clearly, too.
In that post, and I guess in the next one and maybe even in this one, I am advocating that those 9 steps are accurately Voldemort’s plan. But it is not important that I convince you, or anyone, that they are accurate. It is enough that I convince you to consider them. The theory’s own merits and flaws will determine its fate.
So, yes. “Seems to have worked.”
Respectfully, discussion and debate are not consider successful if all you do is cause the other person to understand your position. If no one’s position changes, something is wrong.
Again, my goal is not to convince you or anyone else.
My goal is to test the speculated scenario. I advocate for it not because I want to convince others, but because it doesn’t get much mileage on its own.
As it gets picked apart, I learn more about the the scenario itself, about the material it’s built on, and about the speculative process.
Respectfully, it is silly to assume that no one’s position is changing.